Lack of info on ut1, ut2 zones

[rainman]

I've been reading about training, and all the articles refer to UT1, UT2 etc training zones, but not a single one has any explanation of what they mean! I've searched online and been unable to find a single article that explains them (with a nice table perhaps) except a reddit thread that had a little explanation but not much. (https://www.reddit.com/r/Rowing/comment ... ut2_and_3/)

There's tons of information online about regular heart rate zones, i.e. https://www.polar.com/blog/running-hear ... es-basics/

Why does the rowing community use the UT1, UT2 terminology? How does everyone know what the heck it means?

[Citroen]

We do use UT1, UT2, AT, TR and AN and they have clearly defined bands.

http://www.freespiritsrowing.com/forum/ ... calculator

[rainman]

We do use UT1, UT2, AT, TR and AN and they have clearly defined bands.

http://www.freespiritsrowing.com/forum/ ... calculator

That link doesn't explain why those definitions (UT1 etc) get used in rowing articles, rather than the standard heart rate zones 1, 2, 3 etc. It also doesn't explain the origin of those definitions. I can't find a single source online that properly explains them and more importantly why they are used.

Even the concept2 rowerg app uses the standard heart rate zones. It's as if the rowing blogging community wants to keep things deliberately confusing for newbies.

[jamesg]

It's because generic legacy training notions and notations based on HR theory (Conconi et al) were applied to erging when considered as a way of getting fit.

However rowing differs somewhat from most other sports, being on water so unaffected by gravity, which means we can use any rating without loss of stroke quality.

On the erg, which measures Power, we can use %s of a 2k test Power. Up to 70% is considered aerobic (Row).

If you know what 1,2,3 etc refer to, in terms of HR, sweat, ability to talk, rating, Watts or whatever, presumably you can use these. However this will not teach you to row, should that be needed.

When capable of doing so, in eights I used Paddle <20, Row <24, Race 2k <35. The first two were aerobic.

You can see most of the history in the C2 manuals, available on the C2 erg site:
https://www.concept2.com/service/manuals

[nickels]

Its just attempts at indicating the training stimulus. Hopefully my memory serves well, and this is fairly accurate, even if simplified.

UT1/ UT2 -> Utilization. Supposed to improve how muscles use oxygen. This can happen a few ways. Long slow distance results in an increase of capillaries around the muscles that are doing the work, allowing more oxygenated blood to arrive at the working muscles. It also results in increased, and growths in mitochondria in those muscles, so that they can utilize oxygen better.

AT -> Threshold. The inflection point where the (less efficient) anaerobic system starts to contribute more, and there is an increase of blood lactate (think lactic acid, although most lactic acid talk from previous decades is not real accurate). Going faster while staying aerobic is beneficial because the aerobic system is more efficient, so we want to see if we can achieve faster speeds while minimizing the build-up of blood lactate. Training at threshold is supposed to allow us to delay the onset of blood lactate and process it quicker when it is produced

TR-> Transport - The transportation of blood throughout the body, primarily via the heart. At high-ish heart rates the heart fills, and stretches, resulting in a training effect of higher volume the heart can pump.

AN- Anaerobic training trains the bodies ability to perform work in the absence of oxygen

Heart rate zones don't really explain what is going on. There's nothing inherently logical about training in a given heart rate band, but they are used because they are associated with the stimuluses mentioned above. These zones all have some overlap, but the terminology is used so the primary training affect is understood.

[GlennUk]

Heart rate zones don't really explain what is going on. There's nothing inherently logical about training in a given heart rate band, but they are used because they are associated with the stimuluses mentioned above. These zones all have some overlap, but the terminology is used so the primary training affect is understood.

Its also worth remembering that the calculated HR zones using the various methods are not particularly useful since as an individual your actual HRvalues are likley to vary, my HRmax is 183bpm (by measurement) if i use a calculator i get a value returned of c159bpm depending on what calculation method i use.

Similarly, the HR ranges set out in various exercise regimes cannot accurately determine when an individuals body transitions from one condition to the next, that can only be done by lab testing is my understanding, even then it may vary over time with training/age.

I believe that some prefer to us RPE rather than relying on HR values because of this difficulty, i.e. if you feel like you cant continue at a specific pace then that may be good enough to determine what HR range you should exercise in, based on the training programme you follow/develop.

[p_b82]

That link doesn't explain why those definitions (UT1 etc) get used in rowing articles, rather than the standard heart rate zones 1, 2, 3 etc. It also doesn't explain the origin of those definitions. I can't find a single source online that properly explains them and more importantly why they are used.

Even the concept2 rowerg app uses the standard heart rate zones. It's as if the rowing blogging community wants to keep things deliberately confusing for newbies.

Not wanting to come across as contrary, but what does it matter the why/when that the rowing community started to use UT2/UT1/AT etc?

I think that because rowing is a very unique blend of strength and endurance, basic HR zones don't tell the complete picture and so something else was developed to represent how HR and effort can tie together and be used a rough guide.

There's plenty of data online to explain what the various zones represent and how they can be tied to MHR or other physiological results.

For me personally as a n00b I've worked out what effort (power) outputs correspond to a HR in roughly the appropriate HR training zone in ergdata and just gone with that.
zone 2 = UT2 ~135bpm
zone 3 = UT1 ~145bpm
zone 4/5 boundary = AT ~170bpm (is in ergdata's zone5 for me)
zone 5 = max effort 175+

[Dangerscouse]

Not wanting to come across as contrary, but what does it matter the why/when that the rowing community started to use UT2/UT1/AT etc?

I think that because rowing is a very unique blend of strength and endurance, basic HR zones don't tell the complete picture and so something else was developed to represent how HR and effort can tie together and be used a rough guide.

There's plenty of data online to explain what the various zones represent and how they can be tied to MHR or other physiological results.

For me personally as a n00b I've worked out what effort (power) outputs correspond to a HR in roughly the appropriate HR training zone in ergdata and just gone with that.
zone 2 = UT2 ~135bpm
zone 3 = UT1 ~145bpm
zone 4/5 boundary = AT ~170bpm (is in ergdata's zone5 for me)
zone 5 = max effort 175+

Yeah, once you give it some thought it's not overly complicated at all, and it's just our terminology. In some respects it's similar to us British calling them courgettes, and Americans calling them zucchini: neither are wrong, they're just different.

[Tony Cook]

… it's similar to us British calling them courgettes, and Americans calling them zucchini: neither are wrong, they're just different.

It was wrong when I asked my American host what I should wear to dinner and he said, ‘It’s casual. Just come in your vest and pants.’

[Tsnor]

That link doesn't explain why those definitions (UT1 etc) get used in rowing articles, rather than the standard heart rate zones 1, 2, 3 etc....

I think that because rowing is a very unique blend of strength and endurance, basic HR zones don't tell the complete picture ...

Rainman, I agree with you that the rowing usage would be simpler if rowers used the same terms that runners and bikers use. I will try to use those going forward. I suspect overlapping timing is the root cause of different sports starting with different terms, and that convergence would be good.

Research says for endurance work the exact same heart behaviour is seen in rowers, cyclists, runners, nordic skiers, swimmers, soccer players, etc. Anything over 3 mins that is endurance based. So, while rowing does drive a very high VO2 max and builds a lot of muscles, the same terms and HR based training response patterns should work. The guy who popularized "polarized training" (Seiler) is a US rowing masters champ, and he uses terms like Lactate Threshold and Ventilatory Threshold when speaking to rowing coaches (https://youtu.be/-l1qUftZurw) so we should be able to learn to use them also.

[Dangerscouse]

… it's similar to us British calling them courgettes, and Americans calling them zucchini: neither are wrong, they're just different.

It was wrong when I asked my American host what I should wear to dinner and he said, ‘It’s casual. Just come in your vest and pants.’

Hahaha

[aussie nick]

… it's similar to us British calling them courgettes, and Americans calling them zucchini: neither are wrong, they're just different.

It was wrong when I asked my American host what I should wear to dinner and he said, ‘It’s casual. Just come in your vest and pants.’

the word Fanny can be problematic too